I very rarely enter root on my Slackware box... So, if someone were to pWn me, I'd lose at most that account, maybe a few apps. The core system would still be fully functional and uncompromised.
Someone on here once pointed out: who cares if someone compromises your OS? That's easy to reinstall. Compromising your personal files in your home directory, though? Those might not be backed up (or not frequently enough), and if we lost that, most of us would be in real trouble.
It's amazing to me, but Microsoft didn't test the definitions on a computer with Norton Anti-virus!
It certainly doesn't susprise me. There are thousands of different applications out there, and Microsoft can't test all of them. If I were testing anti-malware software, it probably wouldn't occur to me to test it on a computer that already had a competing anti-malware product installed, because the competing product might detect the same malware and try to remove it, thus messing up my tests. Of course I'm sure they tested the application to make sure it could coexist peacefully, but this was an update to the definitions file; how much testing do you expect them to do?
They (rumor sites in general) make shit up, plain and simple.
I'm more inclined to believe that other people make stuff up, and submit it to rumor sites, perhaps anonymously. This particular rumor has been going around for quite awhile; I've seen a Photoshop mockup several months ago.
Of course, as others have pointed out, rumors of Apple switching to Intel chips have been going around for years, and were considered far less credible than this.
2) Apple doesn't ever talk about battery life for a reaon...
As others have mentioned, Apple did say the battery life would be "about the same", but nobody's mentioned that the reason they didn't commit to any solid numbers was, they hadn't finished developing the MacBook Pro. They were demoing prototype models, and although they expect the final product to have battery life roughtly comparable to similar the PowerBooks they're replacing, the reason Apple didn't give anything definitive was that Apple didn't know what the battery life would actually end up being. They know what kind of batteries they'll be using, and they know how much power the components are supposed to draw, but since they hadn't built a production model yet, they hadn't tested a production model yet, and all they knew was roughly what the battery life should be, not what it will be.
I suspect that the Windows version of iTunes uses a port of WebKit to render the iTMS although I can't verify that.
You suspect incorrectly. The Mac version of iTunes doesn't use WebKit either. The iTunes Music Store does use HTTP, but it does not use HTML. This might interest you; that's linked from here.
You can certainly download Service Pack 2 from their web site. I have it burned on a CD. Installing it is usually the first thing I do when working on an XP machine that doesn't already have it.
You don't think making the rounds and posing for pictures should be part of the Mayor's job? It's certainly not what he should be spending all of his time on, but yes, I believe making face-to-face contact with people - especially people who work for the city of which he is Mayor - should be part of his job, and therefore counts as working, even if it doesn't sound nearly as hard as the work you get paid a lot less money to do.
Apple tells you, when you sign up for the iTunes Music Store, that it's your responsibility to keep all your purcases backed up. I believe they suggest burning them to CD or copying them to another computer. They make it clear that you won't just be able to re-download them... but I have heard that if you call Apple and explain your situation, they'll usually let you re-download them.
People in this country seem to have forgotten that when a product or service you've paid for doesn't work the way you expect, the correct response is to talk to the company and see what kind of a solution you can agree on - not throw the product in the trash!
For future reference: iPods can work with either HFS+ or FAT32 formatting; when you format them on a Mac, they get HFS+ formatted which was the case here (this is so you can do cool things like install OSX onto the iPod and boot a computer from it). I believe there is a product out there that will let you access an HFS+ iPod from Windows, but I don't remember what it was called. However, if you've got a Linux box available, you shouldn't have any trouble - you'll probably need to recompile your kernel with support for Macintosh partitions and the HFS+ filesystem (or these might be available as modules, I don't know). Linux does SCSI emulation for FireWire devices, so you should just be able to mount the iPod as/dev/sda6 or something (Mac drives have lots of partitions, so you might need to try a few before you find the right one).
Anyway, once you get access to the files, you should be able to just copy them to whatever computer you want, and drag them into iTunes.
And yes, I'm aware this is not a viable solution for non-technical people. I'm only suggesting it for people like you who work for non-technical people.
The moral of the story: remember that Apple doesn't allow you to transfer music from an iPod to a computer, they never have, they probably never will. Apple also doesn't allow you to re-download music you've already purchased from iTMS. I believe these are part of their agreement with record companies, to make copyright infringement somehow less convenient. Keep a copy of all your music on your computer, and treat it the same way you'd treat any other important files: keep regular backups of everything. If it's not important enough to back up, then it's not important enough to whine about when you lose it.
And none of this had anything to do with the fact that his battery died. Take a look at http://www.apple.com/batteries/ for information about how to take care of your batteries.
In a more fundamental sense, Computer Science is a branch of Mathematics - number theory in particular.
Computer Science may be a branch of mathematics, but software development is a lot more complicated than that. That's like saying pottery is a branch of chemistry, because it's just working with materials that are designed to change their physical structure when you bake them in a kiln. Science only provides the tools, in both these cases.
And frankly, Google Talk didn't bring anything new to the table...
It brings Jabber to non-technical people. Signing up for GTalk is just as easy as signing up for any other IM service. You don't have to know anything about the protocol, the different clients available, the different servers available, or how to configure anything.
How many GTalk users do you think even know what Jabber is?
Apple has had e-mail/IM integration for a couple years now. Mac OS X's Mail client shows a little colored dot next to each e-mail you receive, indicating whether the sender is currently online; in iChat, Cmd-Opt-E opens an e-mail to the person you're chatting with; Address Book integrates your e-mail contacts with your buddy list.
Good to see Google is bringing this sort of thing to other platforms.
Note that Mac OS X already includes all of these languages (as well as C, C++, Objective C, Java, and probably a couple others) - just not ActiveState's versions.
Strange. I've heard plenty of horror stories about accounts getting locked and no customer service whatsoever, but I've never thought their web site UI was difficult or hard to use. And their developer documentation (for those who build web sites that handle automatic payments) is really excellent, with clear examples in a variety of scripting languages, and a sandbox server you can test your code against without actually transferring money around.
I did have a problem where every time I tried to sign in from another country, I'd get a security warning; I don't remember if I was actually able to log in or not. I expect they've fixed that bug by now.
It sounds like the best solution to your immediate problem is a better inventory tracking system, with your web site automatically updated to reflect when items are out of stock. NewEgg.com is one example of a company that does this - when you're shopping on their site, you'll often see items listed as being out of stock, and you get an option to be notified when their next shipment comes in, but they won't let you buy it.
you know what would be great. if a book review was on a book that coverd current standards, not a book that covered standards form 3 years ago. we are now looking ate XHTML 2.0 and CSS 3. media types are the shit! Sanguis
Who's "we"? I'm looking at at least 80% of browsers that don't know what XHTML is. CSS 3? Yeah right.
If you write valid HTML 4.01 Transitional, you can keep most of your old familiar tags, keep your nested tables, use CSS when you want, AND get all the advantages of writing valid code: it works more consistently across browsers, and HTML validation tools (including http://validator.w3.org/) can save you hours of time tracking down weird rendering bugs caused by stupid typos.
The basic hoops you have to jump through:
Add a DOCTYPE declaration at the top
Specify the character set with the Content-type header (you can use a meta tag)
Add alternate text for blind users to every image (for unimportant decorative images alt="" is fine)
Once you've done that, try to validate it, and if it doesn't validate, fix the first error or two and try again. Don't get discouraged if you see 500 errors; many of those only show up because of previous errors that confused the validator. Just fix one at a time, and it probably won't take that long.
If you get in the habit of doing this on every page you write, you'll come to really appreciate how helpful the validator can be.
Microsoft has already been pursuing legal action against spammers. They're on our side here. Spam costs Hotmail a hell of a lot of money.
(x) The police will not put up with it
This is true, until Congress earmarks funding for it. Sorry, I forgot to specifically mention this requirement in my post.
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
Legal action doesn't require central authority over e-mail, it only requires authority over the spammer.
(x) Open relays in foreign countries
I shouldn't have said technical solutions are not the answer. Technical solutions are part of the answer. We're already using technical solutions to deal with this problem (RBLs).
(x) Asshats
Have something specific in mind?
(x) Jurisdictional problems
The majority of spammers are in the United States, and foreign governments have agreed to collaborate on this problem (I can't find a link now, but it was mentioned on Slashdot).
(x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
Who controls the armies? Those are the people that would be targeted.
(x) Extreme profitability of spam
Huge fines or jail time would make spam far less profitable.
(x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
Yeah, maybe. If a spammer can make it look like their spam came from an innocent party, that could be a problem.
(x) Technically illiterate politicians You got me on this one.
(x) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves That's part of why what they're doing is illegal.
(x) Outlook Has nothing to do with this.
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical Nobody has allocated funding for it on the scale that would be required.
(x) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation Sorry, but I don't agree.
(x) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored Absolutely; this is one of the areas where technical solutions have trouble, but a legislative solution would work fine.
(x) I don't want the government reading my email They wouldn't have to.
(x) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough As I understand it, jail is pretty slow.
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work. If it doesn't, I'd be interested to see exactly why, and then go from there.
Slashdot Mirror
I very rarely enter root on my Slackware box... So, if someone were to pWn me, I'd lose at most that account, maybe a few apps. The core system would still be fully functional and uncompromised.
Someone on here once pointed out: who cares if someone compromises your OS? That's easy to reinstall. Compromising your personal files in your home directory, though? Those might not be backed up (or not frequently enough), and if we lost that, most of us would be in real trouble.
Servers are very different, of course.
It's amazing to me, but Microsoft didn't test the definitions on a computer with Norton Anti-virus!
It certainly doesn't susprise me. There are thousands of different applications out there, and Microsoft can't test all of them. If I were testing anti-malware software, it probably wouldn't occur to me to test it on a computer that already had a competing anti-malware product installed, because the competing product might detect the same malware and try to remove it, thus messing up my tests. Of course I'm sure they tested the application to make sure it could coexist peacefully, but this was an update to the definitions file; how much testing do you expect them to do?
I heard that too, from some Podcaster who said he's got connections inside Apple. I guess this confirms it!
They (rumor sites in general) make shit up, plain and simple.
I'm more inclined to believe that other people make stuff up, and submit it to rumor sites, perhaps anonymously. This particular rumor has been going around for quite awhile; I've seen a Photoshop mockup several months ago.
Of course, as others have pointed out, rumors of Apple switching to Intel chips have been going around for years, and were considered far less credible than this.
2) Apple doesn't ever talk about battery life for a reaon...
As others have mentioned, Apple did say the battery life would be "about the same", but nobody's mentioned that the reason they didn't commit to any solid numbers was, they hadn't finished developing the MacBook Pro. They were demoing prototype models, and although they expect the final product to have battery life roughtly comparable to similar the PowerBooks they're replacing, the reason Apple didn't give anything definitive was that Apple didn't know what the battery life would actually end up being. They know what kind of batteries they'll be using, and they know how much power the components are supposed to draw, but since they hadn't built a production model yet, they hadn't tested a production model yet, and all they knew was roughly what the battery life should be, not what it will be.
I suspect that the Windows version of iTunes uses a port of WebKit to render the iTMS although I can't verify that.
You suspect incorrectly. The Mac version of iTunes doesn't use WebKit either. The iTunes Music Store does use HTTP, but it does not use HTML. This might interest you; that's linked from here.
That depends... how many of them are currently active contributors to WebKit?
You can certainly download Service Pack 2 from their web site. I have it burned on a CD. Installing it is usually the first thing I do when working on an XP machine that doesn't already have it.
You don't think making the rounds and posing for pictures should be part of the Mayor's job? It's certainly not what he should be spending all of his time on, but yes, I believe making face-to-face contact with people - especially people who work for the city of which he is Mayor - should be part of his job, and therefore counts as working, even if it doesn't sound nearly as hard as the work you get paid a lot less money to do.
...sales dweebs/bimbos. ZERO morals, which I'd like to think was part of the reason they were fired.
;-)
Or possibly the reason they were hired in the first place. Honesty doesn't make higher sales.
Apple tells you, when you sign up for the iTunes Music Store, that it's your responsibility to keep all your purcases backed up. I believe they suggest burning them to CD or copying them to another computer. They make it clear that you won't just be able to re-download them... but I have heard that if you call Apple and explain your situation, they'll usually let you re-download them.
/dev/sda6 or something (Mac drives have lots of partitions, so you might need to try a few before you find the right one).
People in this country seem to have forgotten that when a product or service you've paid for doesn't work the way you expect, the correct response is to talk to the company and see what kind of a solution you can agree on - not throw the product in the trash!
For future reference: iPods can work with either HFS+ or FAT32 formatting; when you format them on a Mac, they get HFS+ formatted which was the case here (this is so you can do cool things like install OSX onto the iPod and boot a computer from it). I believe there is a product out there that will let you access an HFS+ iPod from Windows, but I don't remember what it was called. However, if you've got a Linux box available, you shouldn't have any trouble - you'll probably need to recompile your kernel with support for Macintosh partitions and the HFS+ filesystem (or these might be available as modules, I don't know). Linux does SCSI emulation for FireWire devices, so you should just be able to mount the iPod as
Anyway, once you get access to the files, you should be able to just copy them to whatever computer you want, and drag them into iTunes.
And yes, I'm aware this is not a viable solution for non-technical people. I'm only suggesting it for people like you who work for non-technical people.
The moral of the story: remember that Apple doesn't allow you to transfer music from an iPod to a computer, they never have, they probably never will. Apple also doesn't allow you to re-download music you've already purchased from iTMS. I believe these are part of their agreement with record companies, to make copyright infringement somehow less convenient. Keep a copy of all your music on your computer, and treat it the same way you'd treat any other important files: keep regular backups of everything. If it's not important enough to back up, then it's not important enough to whine about when you lose it.
And none of this had anything to do with the fact that his battery died. Take a look at http://www.apple.com/batteries/ for information about how to take care of your batteries.
In a more fundamental sense, Computer Science is a branch of Mathematics - number theory in particular.
Computer Science may be a branch of mathematics, but software development is a lot more complicated than that. That's like saying pottery is a branch of chemistry, because it's just working with materials that are designed to change their physical structure when you bake them in a kiln. Science only provides the tools, in both these cases.
Note to Verizon: if it is more profitable to lease bandwidth to ISPs than it is to be one, get out of the ISP business!
Their marketing department won't let them.
Take a look.
And frankly, Google Talk didn't bring anything new to the table...
It brings Jabber to non-technical people. Signing up for GTalk is just as easy as signing up for any other IM service. You don't have to know anything about the protocol, the different clients available, the different servers available, or how to configure anything.
How many GTalk users do you think even know what Jabber is?
Not to sound like a Google fanboy, but I absolutely LOVE GTalk for its nice clean interface...
Perhaps it wouldn't surprise you to learn that GTalk looks nearly identical to Apple's iChat. Google didn't come up with that look you like so much.
another thing that will be banned for school/work
That depends on where you work. At some places, using IM is mandatory.
Apple has had e-mail/IM integration for a couple years now. Mac OS X's Mail client shows a little colored dot next to each e-mail you receive, indicating whether the sender is currently online; in iChat, Cmd-Opt-E opens an e-mail to the person you're chatting with; Address Book integrates your e-mail contacts with your buddy list.
Good to see Google is bringing this sort of thing to other platforms.
Note that Mac OS X already includes all of these languages (as well as C, C++, Objective C, Java, and probably a couple others) - just not ActiveState's versions.
Strange. I've heard plenty of horror stories about accounts getting locked and no customer service whatsoever, but I've never thought their web site UI was difficult or hard to use. And their developer documentation (for those who build web sites that handle automatic payments) is really excellent, with clear examples in a variety of scripting languages, and a sandbox server you can test your code against without actually transferring money around.
I did have a problem where every time I tried to sign in from another country, I'd get a security warning; I don't remember if I was actually able to log in or not. I expect they've fixed that bug by now.
It sounds like the best solution to your immediate problem is a better inventory tracking system, with your web site automatically updated to reflect when items are out of stock. NewEgg.com is one example of a company that does this - when you're shopping on their site, you'll often see items listed as being out of stock, and you get an option to be notified when their next shipment comes in, but they won't let you buy it.
you know what would be great. if a book review was on a book that coverd current standards, not a book that covered standards form 3 years ago. we are now looking ate XHTML 2.0 and CSS 3. media types are the shit! Sanguis
Who's "we"? I'm looking at at least 80% of browsers that don't know what XHTML is. CSS 3? Yeah right.
The basic hoops you have to jump through:
Once you've done that, try to validate it, and if it doesn't validate, fix the first error or two and try again. Don't get discouraged if you see 500 errors; many of those only show up because of previous errors that confused the validator. Just fix one at a time, and it probably won't take that long.
If you get in the habit of doing this on every page you write, you'll come to really appreciate how helpful the validator can be.
HTML 4.01 Strict is just as easy to validate, just as semantic, just as strict, AND works in MSIE. Why would you recommend XHTML instead?
(x) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
Not if spam is defined well enough, which I admit is a non-trivial problem.
(x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
See the SpamHaus ROKSO list. Finding them isn't the problem.
(x) Microsoft will not put up with it
Microsoft has already been pursuing legal action against spammers. They're on our side here. Spam costs Hotmail a hell of a lot of money.
(x) The police will not put up with it
This is true, until Congress earmarks funding for it. Sorry, I forgot to specifically mention this requirement in my post.
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
Legal action doesn't require central authority over e-mail, it only requires authority over the spammer.
(x) Open relays in foreign countries
I shouldn't have said technical solutions are not the answer. Technical solutions are part of the answer. We're already using technical solutions to deal with this problem (RBLs).
(x) Asshats
Have something specific in mind?
(x) Jurisdictional problems
The majority of spammers are in the United States, and foreign governments have agreed to collaborate on this problem (I can't find a link now, but it was mentioned on Slashdot).
(x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
Who controls the armies? Those are the people that would be targeted.
(x) Extreme profitability of spam
Huge fines or jail time would make spam far less profitable.
(x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
Yeah, maybe. If a spammer can make it look like their spam came from an innocent party, that could be a problem.
(x) Technically illiterate politicians You got me on this one.
(x) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves That's part of why what they're doing is illegal.
(x) Outlook Has nothing to do with this.
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical Nobody has allocated funding for it on the scale that would be required.
(x) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation Sorry, but I don't agree.
(x) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored Absolutely; this is one of the areas where technical solutions have trouble, but a legislative solution would work fine.
(x) I don't want the government reading my email They wouldn't have to.
(x) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough As I understand it, jail is pretty slow.
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work. If it doesn't, I'd be interested to see exactly why, and then go from there.